Some notes about the QR analysis

...This example seems to suggest that the risk taker may lose something in the short term, but in the long term the risk taker is the winner. Is there a way to work this out better?

It spurs a few thoughts:

1. Millinger might have taken some risks later in the course, where he probably lost the race against Troeng. Check out his track around controls 12 and 14:

2. As a strategy, I think risk taking can be, well, risky. I think the "full speed, no mistakes" way of thinking is probably more likely to work more often.

3. The sort of information you can get from GPS tracks gives us a tool to start to work out a lot of things we've never really been able to study before. By looking at different speeds at different parts of a leg - not just split times - we can figure out a lot about how someone is orienteering. With a bit of work, we should be able to discern different styles of orienteering.

Based on your point #1; if you're a risk taker you need to know when and how to take the risk. This is a skill, like reading a map or picking a route. Millinger doesn't know so he lost and Troeng knows how and when to take a risk.